Category Archives: State news

local news, State news

Play the Anthem at these events

1 Comment

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

This is an item that likely shouldn’t give me much of a reason to get upset, but in a strange way it does bother me.

Mark Cuban, the flamboyant and mouthy owner of the NBA’s Dallas Mavericks, has decided to no longer allow the National Anthem to be played at the start of Mavericks games at the American Airlines Center in downtown Dallas.

I guess Cuban is tired of fighting the ongoing battle over whether athletes should be allowed to “take a knee” to protest police brutality — chiefly against people of color — in cities across the nation. The NBA has issued statements in support of players’ actions when the Anthem gets played.

Perhaps the decision by the Mavs’ owner to no longer allow the Anthem to be played and sung at the AA Center is his way of cutting his losses, or seeking a path of lesser resistance.

Make no mistake about this: I am highly unlikely to attend a Mavs game any time soon. It’s too expensive for little ol’ fixed-income, retired me. Plus, I live about 30 miles north of the arena and parking downtown can be a hassle; I’m too old for that kind of grief, you know?

However, I do enjoy the sound of the Anthem at sporting events. It’s a bit of Americana played out in real time.

Am I nuts about the athletes’ protests, their “taking a knee” while the Anthem is played? Not really. It’s not the way I would express my displeasure over government policy. However, I respect that form of protest as a peaceful expression of disagreement. Thus, I am conflicted somewhat by the entire matter.

Whatever …

It’s Mark Cuban’s team. He has all the money he can ever spend and his face can be seen all over the place, given his role on a broadcast network TV reality show and his penchant for making a spectacle of himself.

Cuban’s decision to ban the National Anthem at Mavericks games irks me … but I’ll get over it.

State news

A curious appointment

1 Comment

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Hang on a second, Mr. Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives.

Speaker Dade Phelan talked a good game about working across the aisle when he took the gavel at the start of the current Texas Legislature. Then he makes what I consider to be a peculiar committee chair appointment that seems to run counter to his hopeful bipartisan talk.

Briscoe Cain, a Deer Park Republican, is the new chair of the House Elections Committee. Why is that a head-scratcher? Well, Cain spent some time in Pennsylvania seeking ways to overturn the results of that state’s presidential vote total, which awarded its electoral votes to Joe Biden, the Democrat who defeated Donald Trump.

He was looking for evidence of vote fraud that Trump kept insisting occurred in that state and others that voted for Biden.

Briscoe Cain, who helped Trump campaign challenge results, will lead election work in Texas House | The Texas Tribune

Cain said Texans deserve to know their elections are being run fairly, legally and without bias. I believe they are run that way. What I am having trouble understanding is how someone with a known history of pursuing what I call The Big Lie about the 2020 election should be given a committee chairmanship in Texas. I am left to wonder whether Chairman Cain is going to lead his committee on similar wild goose chases looking for vote fraud that no one can prove exists in Texas.

It smacks to me of the kind of foolishness put forth by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who offered to pay someone — anyone! — a million bucks if they could find vote fraud in Texas. He hasn’t paid any money … because there isn’t any fraud to be found!

This appointment by the shiny new speaker of the House also makes me cringe just a bit that Speaker Phelan isn’t quite the seeker of bipartisanship that he told us he would be as the Man of the House.

I want Speaker Phelan to disprove my fear. This appointment doesn’t do much to assuage my concern.

Note: A version of this blog post was published initially on KETR.org.

education news, local news, State news

Bill takes aim at in-state tuition

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

A couple of North Texas freshmen legislators don’t like the idea of allowing undocumented immigrants to pay in-state tuition rates at public colleges and universities.

I believe they are mistaken if they think the state is going to reap a reward by making it difficult for young Texas residents to achieve higher education degrees.

State Reps. Bryan Slaton of Royse City and Jeff Cason of Bedford — both Republicans — have proposed a bill that would allow colleges to determine a student’s residence and decide whether they qualify for in-state tuition.

I will interject that two other Texas Republican politicians of considerable note — Govs. George W. Bush and Rick Perry — endorsed the idea of allowing undocumented immigrants to pay in-state tuition. Why? Because both of them recognized the value that college educations bring to the state, even when some of its residents lack the necessary immigration documents.

Bush, Perry are right about in-state tuition issue | High Plains Blogger

I don’t know what Gov. Greg Abbott would do with a bill if it reaches his desk. I am wishing he would veto it.

This legislation falls into the “heartless” category of lawmaking. It seeks to target Texas residents who are seeking to improve their circumstance by attending higher education institutions. Given that they do reside in Texas, they have — in my humble estimation — earned the right to attend these schools as Texas residents.

The Texas Tribune reported: “Texans’ tax dollars should not be used to reward and encourage illegal immigration to our state and nation,” Cason said in a statement.

Texas lawmakers want to block in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants | The Texas Tribune

Maybe I am slow on the uptake, but I am having a bit of difficulty understanding how allowing these students to pay in-state tuition constitutes a Texas taxpayer subsidy, or how it encourages “illegal immigration to our state and nation.”

President Biden already has restored the Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals program for those undocumented immigrants who were brought here by their parents. Many of those DACA recipients are enrolled in Texas public colleges and universities. They might be deemed unable to continue their education if Slaton and Cason’s bill becomes law.

This law deserves the fate that a 2019 effort met. It failed to come out of the House Higher Education Committee. I hope this notion withers and dies, too.

local news, State news

Listen up: Texas cannot secede!

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Is it OK to presume that every state legislative body has a wacky caucus in its ranks? If so, then Texas isn’t alone in the legislative wackiness that presents itself from time to time.

Consider this from a Republican state representative, Kyle Biedermann of Fredericksburg, who has pitched a resolution calling for a statewide election to determine whether Texas can secede from the Union.

Yes, the secessionists have returned! Oh, my. When does the madness stop? Don’t answer that. I know that it will never stop. It will never end.

The Texas Tribune reports what many of us know already, that the state cannot secede legally. The Civil War took care of that, right?

Texas seceded once already, joining the Confederacy in trying to break apart the United States of America. It went to war against the government, against fellow Americans. The issue? Slavery. The Civil War ended correctly, with the Union prevailing.

The Tribune wrote this about Biedermann’s idea:

“It is now time that the People of Texas are allowed the right to decide their own future,” he said in a statement announcing the legislation.

The bill d oesn’t appear to have much of a chance. And even if it did, experts say, Texas can’t just secede.

“The legality of seceding is problematic,” Eric McDaniel, associate professor of government at the University of Texas at Austin, told The Texas Tribune in 2016. “The Civil War played a very big role in establishing the power of the federal government and cementing that the federal government has the final say in these issues.”

Texas can’t secede from the U.S. Here’s why. | The Texas Tribune

Texas declared independence from Mexico in 1836. We joined the Union in 1845, adopting a resolution that contained language that said the state could partition itself into four parts if it wanted. Indeed, a former Texas Panhandle legislator, David Swinford of Dumas, once pitched the notion as recently as 1991. I asked Rep. Swinford whether he meant it as a serious proposal … and he did not say he was joking. 

Secession, though, is a non-starter. The Tribune cites a bit of wisdom offered by the late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia: “The answer is clear,” Scalia wrote. “If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede. (Hence, in the Pledge of Allegiance, ‘one Nation, indivisible.’)”

local news, State news

Sighing in relief … sort of

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

A half-hearted sigh of relief is in order.

While most of the nation reels from the publicity surrounding the far right wing nut jobs who are dominating some of our news cycles, I am relieved to realize that my member of Congress — the young man who represents my family and me in Collin County, Texas — is not among the wackos.

Rep. Van Taylor is a Republican from Plano who is serving his second term. He succeeded a legend in these parts, the late GOP U.S. Rep. Sam Johnson, a former Vietnam War prisoner and a longtime Republican stalwart.

Taylor, too, is a veteran. He served as a Marine Corps officer in Iraq. He is a patriot who never, ever — in my humble view — subscribe to the disgraceful ideology ascribed to QAnon adherents who represent other congressional districts.

And for that I am grateful.

Now, having lauded my congressman, I want to offer just a few brief words of condemnation to our state’s junior U.S. senator, Ted Cruz.

The Cruz Missile dishonored the state and the office he occupies by insisting on an audit of the 2020 presidential election. He still to this very day hasn’t even had the decency to refer to President Biden by name and title, which he acquired in a free, fair and totally secure election.

Cruz has swallowed the Big Lie served up by the former president of the United States, and he makes me ashamed that he represents my interests in the Senate.

So, we have the good and the not so good. I will cling to the belief that Rep. Van Taylor will continue to adhere to honest and well-considered principle. I might disagree with him most of the time. I honor the fealty he pays to the U.S. Constitution and to the oath he took to defend and protect it.

State news

Abbott vs. O’Rourke in ’22?

Photo by Richard W. Rodriguez/AP/REX/Shutterstock 

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Gosh, we just finished a contentious presidential election that produced a violent transition of power from Donald Trump to Joe Biden.

Now it’s time to look just a bit ahead to 2022 and what is shaping up here in Texas. A potential donnybrook between Gov. Greg Abbott and former Congressman Beto O’Rourke.

Oh, boy. Pass the popcorn.

O’Rourke spilled some of the beans when he told an El Paso radio station that he might run for governor in 2022, seeking to generate the excitement he ginned up when he almost defeated U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz in 2018. Unfortunately for O’Rourke, the Texas buzz didn’t play on the national stage as he sought the presidency in 2020; he dropped out early from the Democratic Party primary contest.

He did make some news, though, he declared “Hell yes,” he intends to take away people’s AR-15 assault weapons.

Abbott wasted no time capitalizing on that exclamation, declaring that O’Rourke would seek to do that very thing in gun-loving Texas if he is elected governor.

As the Texas Tribune reported: “You’re talking about a person who says they want to run for governor who said, ‘Heck yes,’ he’s gonna come and take your guns,” Abbott said, referring to O’Rourke’s 2019 embrace of a mandatory buyback program for assault weapons. “Heck yes, he’s for open borders. Heck yes, he’s for killing the energy sector and fossil fuels in the state of Texas. I don’t think that’s gonna sell real well.”

Greg Abbott, Beto O’Rourke trade barbs over talk of 2022 governor’s race | The Texas Tribune

Here we go. The demagoguery has begun in earnest. Open borders? Killing the fossil fuel energy sector? Does the governor of this state have that kind of exclusive power? Um … no.

As for the gun buyback, the governor cannot do that by himself, either. No governor is “gonna come and take your guns.”

I do hope to see an Abbott-O’Rourke contest in 2022, even if it includes the frightening rhetoric we’re already getting.

State news

Make ’em wear helmets!

2 Comments

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

I know this won’t happen, but it won’t deter me from saying it anyway.

It is that I would hope the 2021 Texas Legislature would rethink a decision that an earlier Legislature made. It rescinded a law that required motorcycle riders – such as those who drive them – to wear helmets.

The 1995 Legislature approved the rescission, which then was signed by the state’s newly elected governor, George W. Bush.

It is a decision that I am certain that many Texans regret. Why? Because they have suffered grievous, traumatic head injury that would have been prevented had they been wearing protective headgear.

Now, of course the Legislature built in some safeguards against madness aboard motorcycles. It required children to wear helmets. It also requires licensed motorcyclists to carry insurance policies that cover a part of their hospitalization. Oh, but here’s the thing: The amount totals $10,000. Do you have any idea how quickly an injured motorcyclist can burn through 10 grand?

Just like – snap! – that. That makes me wonder how much value can be had in such a pittance of a policy.

The 1995 Legislature was feeling its Wheaties, as I recall, when it decided to pull back its mandatory helmet law. I argued vociferously at the time that the Legislature shouldn’t touch the law. I had that argument with many proud, independent Texans who actually disagreed with my view that helmets saved lives and saved Texans millions of dollars in insurance payment increases.

My favorite argument against helmet laws came from a guy in Orange County, Texas, who told me in the early 1990s that he had to feel the “wind in my hair” as he drove his motorcycle. I pray the fellow all these years later still has a head of hair and is still alive to feel it blowing in the breeze.

My wife and I spend time in our pickup driving around Texas; we haul our RV to state parks across our state. We do not exceed 60 mph while pulling our RV, so we get passed continually by motor vehicles along our highways. So help me, as God is my witness, I cringe when a helmet-less motorcyclist whizzes by at some untold speed. I pray he or she stays safe.

We both have a friend, a former colleague of mine, who some years ago got a phone call that every parent dreads. Her son had been involved in a motorcycle wreck in Amarillo. He suffered grievous wounds … to his head. He suffered irreparable brain damage. He lost cognitive skill, the ability to speak clearly and to the best of my knowledge is still living, albeit with state-funded assistance.

On the flip side, I once served with a guy in the Army who told me in 1970 about a terrible motorcycle wreck he suffered in his home state of Indiana. He was alive at that moment to recall what happened. Why? Because he was wearing a helmet at the time of the crash.

“The helmet,” he told me, “saved my life.” I would presume as well that it saved his fellow Indiana taxpayers a ton of money.

BLOGGER’S NOTE: This blog was posted originally on KETR-FM’s website.

State news

Paxton seeks way out from under cloud

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Whenever I see and hear about Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton launching a legal pursuit my mind drifts automatically to the troubles he continues to face.

Paxton is suing the Biden administration over its decision to suspend deportation of immigrants. He says President Biden’s order is in direct violation of an agreement that Biden’s predecessor signed before he left office.

OK, whatever.

I cannot help but wonder about Paxton’s motives, even as he acts in conjunction with his Texas constitutional responsibility.

I don’t trust Ken Paxton’s judgment in the least.

He is awaiting a trial in state court over an allegation that he defrauded investors in a securities fraud matter. A Collin County grand jury indicted him in 2015; his case has dragged on for more than five years.

Plus, we now know that the FBI is looking into allegations by his top legal assistants that he is abusing the power of his office as AG. The feds are looking into it to determine whether there is enough to pursue criminal action.

Don’t you feel well represented by this mediocre lawyer? I damn sure don’t. I want him to resign his office. He embarrassed Texas by filing a ridiculous lawsuit with the Supreme Court that sought to overturn the 2020 presidential election results in several states that voted for President Biden; he wanted the court to overturn those results on phony constitutional grounds. SCOTUS tossed his lawsuit aside, with all three of Donald Trump’s appointees voting with the majority opinion.

Texas AG Ken Paxton needs to quit his office. He needs to return to private life. Every public decision he makes is shrouded by suspicion in many Texans’ eyes — including mine — that we are being represented by a crook.

State news

Yes, governor, vet our Guard, too!

MANDEL NGAN/AFP/Getty Images

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has put his righteous indignation on full display and for the life of me I don’t get why he’s so angry about this effort to make us more secure.

Abbott is angry because the Department of Homeland Security is vetting Texas National Guard troops who are being deployed to assist in securing the nation’s capital in advance of President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration.

He calls the vetting to protect against an inside conspiracy an “insult” to Texas Guard personnel. Abbott swears by the Guard’s love of country and just does not accept that someone within our state’s military ranks could be considered a threat to our government.

Really, governor? Are our men and women more patriotic than military personnel from other states? What in the world would Gov. Abbott think if someone from the Texas National Guard garrison was found to be a member of, say, the Proud Boys or is a QAnon supporter? Is that really and truly so out of the question that DHS and other national security team members shouldn’t check … just to be sure?

Settle down, Gov. Abbott. I share your respect for the men and women who sign up for duty to protect us. However, I also believe that given the attack we experienced on the Sixth of January, we cannot possibly be too careful in guarding against further outbursts of senseless violence.

local news, national news, national security, State news

A ‘new America’ awaits?

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Take a long look at the picture contained in this brief blog post and I fear you are going to presume that this is the look of the new America.

It came to my Facebook page via Nancy Seliger, whose husband — Kel Seliger — reported for duty the other day as a state senator serving in the Texas Legislature.

The heavily armed individuals you see are on guard against potential violence at the Texas Capitol Building in Austin, where 181 members of our Legislature are meeting for the next 140 days to enact laws that govern us.

The riot that erupted Jan. 6 in D.C.? The one that killed five people and damaged the nation’s Capitol Building? The attack on our democratic system of government?

The terrorists who conducted that calamitous attack are vowing more of the same at capitols across the nation. That includes ours in Austin, ladies and gents. Thus, we have heavily armed security personnel on guard.

This is disgusting, reprehensible and is a vile statement of the nature of our political discourse in the Age of Donald Trump. Thankfully and not a moment too soon, that age is about to end. Trump will be gone from the White House.

I am saddened to presume that the anger he stoked for four years isn’t likely to subside just because Trump is no longer in power. Oh, how I hope to be wrong on this matter, but my fears continue to be fueled by FBI reports of alarm bells sounding. They could be hailing further spasms of uncontrolled violence.

Just as 9/11 spawned a new era of travel in this country and around the world, I fear that the Jan. 6 attack on our democratic system has produced a new era that requires such deterrence against those who would take political protest to these deadly extremes.

Let us pray for a return to sanity.